Asking The Right Questions How To Select An Informal Reading Inventory

TEACHING TIPSTEACHING TIPSTEACHING TIPSTEACHING TIPSTEACHING TIPSTEACHI
HING TIPSTEACHING TIPSTEACHING TIPSTEACHING TIPSTEACHING TIPSTEACHING TIPST

TIPSTEACHING TIPSTEACHING TIPSTEACHING TIPSTEACHING TIPSTEACHING TIPSTEA
STEACHING TIPSTEACHING TIPSTEACHING TIPSTEACHING TIPSTEACHING TIPSTEAC
G TIPSTEACHING TIPSTEACHING TIPSTEACHING TIPSTEACHING TIPSTEACHING TIPST
IPSTEACHING TIPSTEACHING TIPSTEACHING TIPSTEACHING TIPSTEACHING TIPSTEA
Asking the Right Questions: How

to Select an Informal Reading Inventory
Rona F. Flippo, Dari-Ann D. Holland, Mary T. McCarthy,
Elizabeth A. Swinning
s teachers, we believe that good and appropriate assessment drives good and appropriate
instruction. Yet schools today are caught up
in an assessment frenzy without allowing sufficient
time for the particular instruction each child needs,
and preoccupation with accountability pervades
most of this assessment activity. In this climate, the
individual needs and preferences of both teachers
and students suffer.
Although large-scale standardized achievement
tests do provide the most easily gathered accountability data, and, although valid, relevant standardized
tests can furnish useful achievement data, these data
are not particularly helpful for classroom instructional purposes. Inordinate amounts of instructional time
go into practicing and preparing for the required accountability tests (Jennings & Rentner, 2006), which
might in turn take precious days to administer.
A Multitude of Options
Keeping in mind that information from informal assessments is essential to provide specific and appropriate data concerning the skills and strategies
of individual students, our graduate class, Literacy
Diagnosis and Instruction, explored various diagnostic assessment options that can help guide literacy
instruction for specific students in specific contexts
(see Flippo, 2003). A combination of several informal
and authentic assessment procedures can provide
very effective tools for teaching younger through
older elementary grade students. Unfortunately, a
certain amount of confusion greets teachers in choosing among the many assessment tools now available
(Paris & Carpenter, 2003).
Informal Reading Inventories (IRIs) are an assessment tool that typically assesses individual students
word recognition, oral reading, strengths, weaknesses, fluency, and comprehension through graded
The Reading Teacher, 63(1), pp. 7983

DOI:10.1598/RT.63.1.8
word lists and passages. IRIs may have their critics

(e.g., Applegate, Quinn, & Applegate, 2002; Walpole
& McKenna, 2006), but they have become the most
commonly used assessments of elementary grade
students reading (Johnston, 1997).
An Abundance of IRIs
The history of IRIs goes back to the work of Emmett

Betts (1946), who is frequently credited with the development of IRI techniques, although some reading
researchers trace their use even further back (Beldin,
1970). Generations of classroom teachers and reading specialists have found IRIs especially useful, as
evidenced by the fact that some of these have attained their 8th, 9th, or 10th editions.
Texts and other professional books that focus
on literacy assessment provide comprehensive information about using and administering IRIs in the
classroom (e.g., Cooper & Kiger, 2005; Flippo, 2003;
Reutzel & Cooter, 2003). The IRIs themselves also
provide much of that information in their manuals
for administering the assessment. Specific help, however, is sadly lacking in selecting an IRI, even though
the popularity of commercially available IRIs has
grown steadily over the years, with new ones appearing constantly (Paris & Carpenter, 2003). Our classs
goal in this context was to help teachers narrow the
offerings to those most appropriate for their classroom students needs, their teaching philosophy or
perspective of reading, and the variety of conditions
in which they teach.
Searching for the Good

Questions
A search of various databases using descriptor phrases such as selecting IRIs, selecting IRIs for classroom
use, choosing IRIs, guidelines for selecting/choosing/
2009 International Reading Association

ISSN: 0034-0561 print / 1936-2714 online
79

NG TIPSTEACHING TIPSTEACHING TIPSTEACHING TIPSTEACHING TIPSTEACHING TIPS
buying/purchasing IRIs, and help with selecting IRIs

yielded chiefly the modestly disappointing insight
that finding the right IRI can involve choices analogous to those involved in buying a car or computer.
The best choice for one particular teacher and his
or her students and situation is not necessarily the
best for another. Lacking still were good questions
to ask.
To develop appropriate review questions, we
studied over the course of a semester many of the
major IRIs, looking at their different features, foci, attributes, scoring, directions for analyses, and implied
philosophies of reading, as well as their more obvious
qualities (e.g., grade levels covered, number of forms
available, length of passages, subject matter used,
and so on). Given our criteria of widely used IRIs
representative of what is commercially available, we
concentrated on IRIs that had undergone multiple editions, such as the Informal Reading Inventory (Burns
& Roe, 2007), Reading Inventory for the Classroom
(Flynt & Cooter, 2004), Basic Reading Inventor y
(Johns, 2005), Qualitative Reading Inventory (Leslie
& Caldwell, 2006), Classroom Reading Inventory
(Silvaroli & Wheelock, 2004), The Stieglitz Informal
Reading Inventory (Stieglitz, 2002), and Analytical
Reading Inventory (Woods & Moe, 2007).
During the semester, each of the authors of this
article took notes on each IRI considered, noting
questions that came to mind, things we liked about a
particular IRI, things we did not like, items that were
unclear, and points we considered especially important about each. When every IRI had been carefully
reviewed, each reviewers notations were compiled
and discussed. Out of this process we painstakingly
distilled our initial set of questions.
Over the next two semesters, 71 teachers (all graduate students) who subsequently took the Literacy
Diagnosis and Instruction course at our urban university used these questions to review IRIs as part of
the course. Based on their suggestions, we deleted,
modified, or collapsed several questions. Generally
speaking, the teachers who have used the evolving
list of questions have found it to be a successful discussion and selection tool. They all indicate that using the questions helped them narrow their choices
and ultimately select the one IRI best suited to their
philosophy and concerns about elementary classroom reading assessment.
80
Questions Teachers Can Ask

Above and beyond a simple question of utility, selecting (and using) the most suitable IRI involves an
extra learning curve not unlike getting the hang of
using a computer, a power tool, or a VCR. It is helpful to get a feel for the authors approach to designing and constructing IRIs, choice of material, grasp
of the real conditions under which students learn,
ability to adapt to a variety of assessment needs, and
so on. We therefore asked ourselves, what are the
five most salient characteristics an IRI should have?
Benefiting from the aforementioned feedback, we
settled finally on five criteria, or clusters: content, the
passages used, measuring comprehension, IRI administration, and interpretation of the results, along
with subsequent instruction based on those results.
These would all combine to help us address the final
consideration: an IRIs overall suitability. When questions fit into more than one cluster, we grouped them
in the step we agreed fit best.
Teachers may naturally want to add their own
questions to customize our list for an even better fit
with their specific classroom needs, students, and
contextsor choose other descriptors and categories for their own purposes. Some may want to delete
questions to make the list more manageable. Such
modifications would embody our objectiveto assist teachers in choosing appropriately from the various IRI assessment options.
We might justifiably contend that the actual process of designing review questions for an assessment
instrument is an excellent learning opportunity for
teachers, empowering them and enabling their professional development. By constructing, deleting, revising, or discussing questions with which to review
an assessment instrument, teachers can continually
develop their awareness of three things: what is most
important to assess for their students, the best way
to assess it, and the experience of culling helpful
insights to provide the best possible instruction for
each child. Selecting the questions to ask, the discussions ensuing, and examination of various IRIs
benefited the teachers participating in the literacy
diagnosis classes synergisticallyas they indicated
over the semesters when we developed these questions. Those in subsequent semesters continue to
benefit from the discussion. In Figure 1 we share our
questions and the steps along the way as you review
The Reading Teacher Vol. 63, No. 1 September 2009

Figure 1
Questions to Ask
Step I: Examine your own reading instruction and assessment beliefs or perspective. Indicate with a check
mark whether a particular IRI is relevant or suitable for your classroom needs.
Step II: Review the content:
____ 1. What does this IRI measure?
____ 2. What specific reading behaviors does it assess?
____ 3. If the IRI is grade-specific, is there a variety of assessments for each?
____ 4. What grade levels and range(s) are included?
____ 5. Are the word recognition lists embedded in sentences or text, or are they out of context?
____ 6. Is this IRI available in other languages for my ELLs?
Step III: Questions about passages:

____ 7. What are the sources of the passages? Are they written for the IRI or are they from actual published
childrens texts or literature?
____ 8. Are both expository and narrative texts, in various genres and subject areas, used for the student
readings?
____ 9. Are the readings interesting and appealing to students of all levels?
____ 10. What length are the passages?
____ 11. Is the material culturally, linguistically, and cognitively appropriate for all my students?
Step IV: Measuring comprehension:

____ 12. Do the reading passages rely heavily on background knowledge for comprehension?
____ 13. Does the opening of the passage provide sufficient information to assist students with little
schemata?
____ 14. Do the comprehension questions include all areas of comprehensionliteral, inferential, and critical?
____ 15. Are there enough comprehension and vocabulary questions per selection?
____ 16. Are metacognitive questions included?
____ 17. Does the IRI include pictures or illustrations appropriate to the text, or other commonly used context
aids?
Step V: Administering the IRI:
____ 18. Overall, is the IRI easy to use and understand?
____ 19. How are data collected on each student? Are the data sheets provided adequate?
____ 20. Do you have to purchase parallel forms of the IRI, or are they included?
____ 21. Does the author provide an explanation of each subtest?
____ 22. What criteria are used to determine independent, instructional, and frustration levels? Do I agree
which miscues (errors) will be counted?
____ 23. Can a teacher easily administer this IRI with her or his own choice of reading selections?
Step VI: Interpreting results and instructional follow-up:

____ 24. Does the IRI provide instructions for interpreting the results?
____ 25. Does it provide suggestions for instruction?
____ 26. Is this IRI going to help me understand the needs, strengths, skills, and strategies of my students?
____ 27. Will the information I learn about my students be worth the time it will take me to administer this
assessment?
Step VII: Reflections on Overall Suitability:
Asking the Right Questions: How to Select an Informal Reading Inventory
81

NG TIPSTEACHING TIPSTEACHING TIPSTEACHING TIPSTEACHING TIPSTEACHING TIPS
an IRI for suitability. In Figure 2 we introduce a chart

to illustrate the review process we suggest.
Multilingual IRIs
Teachers should carefully determine when it is appropriate to administer assessments in English for their
English-language learners (ELLs). With an increase
of ELLs in the general education classroom, some
teachers may want to purchase IRIs available in more
than one language. We hope the authors and publishers of the many IRIs coming onto the market will
see the same opportunity we do to help classroom
teachers and their ELLs from many diverse linguistic
backgrounds by providing such sorely needed multilingual IRIs. For example, Flynt and Cooter (1999)
published an English and Spanish combination IRI,
English-Espaol Reading Inventory for the Classroom,
and Johns (1997) published the Spanish Reading
Inventory.
Figure 2
Flow Chart
82
Assess the options
Select your criteria
Review
Taking a Professional Stance

in Assessment
Use of the questions proposed, or other questions
that teachers want to ask, is important in selecting
the most appropriate IRI for a teachers classroom
from those available. These questions demystify the
selection process, help teachers reflect on their own
values regarding what is important to each of them
and what is important for their particular students,
and allow teachers to take some active control and
a professional stance on their students assessments
and instruction.
Teachers of reading want to know where they are
going to know when they get there. Cochran-Smiths
and Lytles (1993) work suggested that intentional
and systematic inquiry by teachers about their own
questions, classrooms, and work with students result
in meaningful growth and learning for the teachers
involved. We believe the development and use of
questions for selecting assessment tools will help
achieve this and the other goals mentioned.
The whole purpose of literacy instruction is to
help students acquire and enjoy the lifelong habit
of reading. Our students need this to function successfully not only in school but everywhere else: It is
their right and our responsibility. We urge teachers to
consider the options, to find or make time to assess
their students reading skills, strategies, and abilities
using informal classroom assessment. This information will help teachers provide the most appropriate
instruction for each child.
References
Ask the right questions
Evaluate IRI suitability
Yes
No
Make final
choice
Next
IRI
Applegate, M.D., Quinn, K.B., & Applegate, A.J. (2002). Levels of

thinking required by comprehension questions in informal
reading inventories. The Reading Teacher, 56(2), 174180.
Beldin, H.O. (1970). Informal reading testing: Historical review
and review of the research. In W.K. Durr (Ed.), Reading difficulties: Diagnosis, correction, and remediation (pp. 6784).
Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
Betts, E.A. (1946). Foundations of reading instruction. New York:
American Book.
Burns, P.C., & Roe, B.D. (2007). Informal reading inventory: Preprimer to twelfth grade (8th ed.). Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
Cochran-Smith, M., & Lytle, S. (Eds.). (1993). Inside/outside:
Teacher research and knowledge. New York: Teachers College
Press.
Cooper, J.D., & Kiger, N.D. (2005). Literacy assessment: Helping
teachers plan instruction (2nd ed.). Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
Flippo, R.F. (2003). Assessing readers: Qualitative diagnosis and
instruction. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Flynt, E.S., & Cooter, R.B. (1999). English-Espaol reading inventory for the classroom. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
The Reading Teacher Vol. 63, No. 1 September 2009
Flippo teaches at the University of Massachusetts

Boston, USA; e-mail rona.flippo@umb.edu. Holland,
McCarthy, and Swinning are former graduate
students of the University of Massachusetts
Boston; e-mail DDenisi@msn.com, mmccarthy@
thenchs.org, and bswinning@aol.com.

Flynt, E.S., & Cooter, R.B. (2004). Reading inventory for the classroom (5th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill/Prentice Hall.
Jennings, J., & Rentner, D.S. (2006). Ten big effects of the No Child
Left Behind Act on public schools. Phi Delta Kappan, 88(2),
110113.
Johns, J.L. (1997). Spanish reading inventor y. Dubuque, IA:
Kendall/Hunt.
Johns, J.L. (2005). Basic reading inventory (9th ed.). Dubuque, IA:
Kendall/Hunt.
Johnston, P.H. (1997). Knowing literacy: Constructive literacy assessment. York, ME: Stenhouse.
Leslie, L., & Caldwell, J. (2006). Qualitative reading inventory (4th
ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Paris, S.G., & Carpenter, R.D. (2003). FAQs about IRIs. The Reading
Teacher, 56(6), 578580.
Reutzel, D.R., & Cooter, R.B. (2003). Strategies for reading assessment and instruction: Helping every child succeed (2nd ed.).
Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill/Prentice Hall.
Silvaroli, N.J., & Wheelock, W.H. (2004). Classroom reading inventory (10th ed.). Boston: McGraw-Hill.
Stieglitz, E.L. (2002). The Stieglitz informal reading inventory:
Assessing reading behaviors from emergent to advanced levels
(3rd ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Walpole, S., & McKenna, M. (2006). The role of informal reading inventories in assessing word recognition. The Reading
Teacher, 59(6), 592594. doi:10.1598/RT.59.6.10
Woods, M.L., & Moe, A.J. (2007). Analytical reading inventory (8th
ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill/Prentice Hall.
Asking the Right Questions: How to Select an Informal Reading Inventory
83

Asking The Right Questions How To Select An Informal Reading Inventory

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Asking The Right Questions How To Select An Informal Reading Inventory

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

TEACHING TIPSTEACHING TIPSTEACHING TIPSTEACHING TIPSTEACHING TIPSTEACHI

HING TIPSTEACHING TIPSTEACHING TIPSTEACHING TIPSTEACHING TIPSTEACHING TIPST